Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 
University  of  Illinois  Library 


JHN 


1965 


L161—  0-1096 


Bntolfc  Tompkins 

2>iet>  august  12,  1905 


‘ ‘ The  whole  sky  of  truth  bends  over  each  recitation  ; and  the 
teacher  needs  but  climb  Sinai  to  receive  the  divine  Law." 


Issued  by  the  Faculty  of  the  Chicago  Normal 
School,  November  25,  1905 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/arnoldtompkinsdiOOchic 


£pnolt>  SompFnns  was  born  on  his  father’s  farm 
eight  miles  south  of  Paris,  Illinois,  September  io, 
1849.  He  died  at  his  country  home  near  Menlo,  in 
northern  Georgia,  August  12,  1905. 

Inheriting  from  both  father  and  mother  a genuine 
love  for  honest  labor,  he  spent  his  whole  life  at  hard 
work.  Through  childhood  and  youth  he  lived  on 
the  farm  with  his  parents,  where  he  worked  many 
hours  a day,  and  always  under  the  highest  tension. 
And,  like  every  true  artist  nature,  he  found  his  greatest 
incentive  in  the  enjoyment  that  came  from  doing  to  the 
best  of  his  ability  something  the  world  needed  done. 
No  man  ever  felt  more  strongly  than  he  the  dignity  in 
honest  toil,  whether  at  the  plow  or  in  the  study. 

His  early  education  was  received  at  “Possum  King- 
dom,” a country  school  near  the  farm,  and  to  which 
reference  is  made  in  “The  Philosophy  of  School  Man- 
agement.” At  the  age  of  fifteen  he  walked  three  miles 
to  attend  another  country  school,  which  was  taught  by 
a man  of  college  training.  That  teacher  taught  him 
algebra  and  geometry,  and  inspired  him  to  go  to  college. 
So  great  was  his  desire  for  an  education  that  through 
the  winter  season  he  rose  at  four  o’clock  in  order  that 
he  might  have  the  morning’s  chores  done  before  start- 
ing to  school.  When  school  was  out  for  the  day  he 
hurried  home  to  help  with  the  farm  work  in  the  evening. 
The  lamp-light  hours  he  used  in  study.  Through  the 
vacation  season  he  hurried  from  the  dinner  table  to  his 
books,  seldom  being  found  resting  with  the  other  la- 
borers. 

At  the  age  of  seventeen  he  taught  a winter  term  of 
school  in  the  country.  In  the  spring  of  the  same  year 
he  attended  the  High  School  at  Paris  for  two  or  three 
months.  The  following  winter  he  again  taught  a country 
school,  all  the  time  looking  forward  to  the  day  he  might 
enter  college.  That  day  came  when,  after  the  wheat 
was  sowed  in  the  fall  of  ‘69,  he  entered  Indiana  Univer- 
13] 


f 


sity.  Yet,  with  all  his  eagerness  for  his  new  work,  he 
was  not  forgetful  of  his  home.  His  letters  to  his  par- 
ents and  brother  and  sisters  were  full  of  tenderness 
and  love.  In  a letter  written  soon  after  reaching  the 
university  he  wrote,  “Father,  I left  you  in  the  field 
with  the  work  to  come  here,  but  not  willingly."  After 
six  months  he  was  forced  to  drop  out  from  overwork. 
The  remainder  of  the  year  he  spent  on  the  farm.  The 
following  September  he  entered  Butler  University,  but 
was  again  forced  to  leave  on  account  of  illness. 

In  December,  ’75,  while  principal  of  a two-room 
school  at  Grand  View,  Illinois,  he  married  Jennie  Sny- 
der, his  associate  teacher.  From  this  time  on  for  sev- 
eral years  he  and  Mrs.  Tompkins  taught  and  attended 
school  alternately,  usually  teaching  through  the  winter 
and  attending  school  in  the  spring.  Both  entered  the 
Indiana  State  Normal  School,  at  Terre  Haute,  in  the 
spring  of  ’75.  Here  he  met  William  A.  Jones,  first 
president  of  the  school,  to  whom  he  gave  the  credit  of 
starting  him  in  organic  thinking.  He  had  full  faith  in 
President  Jones’s  fundamental  idea  of  a Normal  School, 
expressed  in  the  sentence  he  so  often  quoted:  “The 
law  in  the  mind  and  the  thought  in  the  thing  deter- 
mine the  method."  Both  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Tompkins 
graduated  from  the  Indiana  State  Normal  School  in 
1880.  The  next  two  years  they  taught  at  Worthington, 
Indiana,  Mr.  Tompkins  as  superintendent. 

His  real  work  in  school  organization  on  a philo- 
sophic basis  began  when,  in  the  fall  of  ’82,  he  entered 
upon  his  work  as  superintendent  of  schools  at  Frank- 
lin, Indiana.  At  the  end  of  his  first  year  at  Franklin 
he  published  “A  Graded  Course  of  Study  for  the 
Franklin  Public  School,"  a book  of  240  pages,  based  on 
the  logical  and  psychological  factors  in  education.  He 
had  not  yet,  as  the  course  shows,  unified  these  factors 
as  he  did  a little  later  on,  but  he  was  far  in  advance  of 
the  school  thought  common  at  that  time. 

[4] 


From  this  time  on  his  progress  was  rapid.  In  ’85 
he  was  chosen  head  of  English  in  the  Normal  School 
of  De  Pauw  University.  He  was  made  dean  of  the 
school  in  ’89,  The  same  year  he  was  graduated  from 
Indiana  University,  degree  of  A.  B,,  just  twenty  years 
after  matriculating.  Two  years  later  he  received  the 
degree  of  A.  M.  from  the  same  institution. 

When,  in  1890,  the  Normal  School  at  De  Pauw 
was  abandoned,  he  accepted  the  chair  of  English  in  the 
Indiana  State  Normal  School.  In  the  fall  of  ’93  he 
entered  the  University  of  Chicago,  where  he  remained 
as  a student  for  two  years,  at  the  end  of  which  time  he 
accepted  the  chair  of  Pedagogy  in  the  University  of 
Illinois.  About  the  same  time  he  was  granted  a doc- 
tor’s degree  by  the  University  of  Ohio.  In  the  fall  of 
’99  he  resigned  his  position  in  the  University  to  accept 
the  presidency  of  the  Illinois  State  Normal  School  at 
Normal.  This  position  he  resigned  in  1900  to  accept 
the  principalship  of  the  Chicago  Normal  School,  which 
position  he  held  at  the  time  of  his  death. 

Mr.  Tompkins  began  lecturing  before  Teachers’ 
Institutes  and  Associations  while  at  Franklin.  His 
first  institute  work  was  at  Cannelton,  Indiana,  in  the 
summer  of  ’83.  About  the  same  time  he  began  writing 
for  the  Indiana  School  Journal,  to  which  he  was  a reg- 
ular  contributor  for  many  years.  He  rapidly  grew  into 
favor  as  a lecturer,  in  which  line  he  was  as  powerful  as 
he  was  in  the  class  room. 

In  1889,  while  at  De  Pauw,  he  published  his  first 
book,  “The  Science  of  Discourse.”  “The  Philosophy 
of  Teaching”  appeared  in  the  spring  of  ’93,  as  did  also 
a reprint  of  “The  Science  of  Discourse.”  In  ’95,  while 
he  was  a student  in  the  University  of  Chicago,  “The 
Philosophy  of  School  Management”  was  published. 

Early  in  his  chosen  life-work  he  struck  a note  that 
sounded  through  all  he  did  in  after  life.  It  was  a “new 
birth,”  an  awakening  into  consciousness  of  what  had 
[5] 


been  instinctively  guiding  him  in  previous  years.  Sub- 
jectively, it  was  what  he  himself  called  the  “major 
premise  of  life;”  objectively,  it  was  that  the  major 
premise  of  life  should  appear  as  the  controlling  factor 
in  every  act,  even  to  the  details  of  daily  life.  A few 
years  ago  when  asked  what  estimate  he  hoped  his 
work  would  merit,  he  replied,  “This:  that  I applied  the 
major  premise  of  life  to  the  most  minute  problem  of 
teaching.”  Those  who  were  closely  associated  with 
him  know  that  in  practice  he  applied  to  the  letter  the 
fundamental  conception  of  life  as  he  saw  it,  whether  in 
teaching  Shakspeare  or  a problem  in  simple  addition. 

As  the  best  short  exposition  of  “the  major  prem- 
ise of  life”  and  its  application  to  teaching,  as  Dr. 
Tompkins  understood  it,  his  Columbus  address  is  here 
printed  in  full. 

The  Implications  and  Applications  of  the  Principle 
of  Self-Activity  in  Education. 

The  impressive  lesson  from  the  history  of  thought 
is  that  the  human  mind  can  find  no  peace  except  in 
search  for  the  ultimate  unity  and  reality  of  the  universe. 
This  unity,  as  discerned  from  afar  by  the  eye  of  faith  in 
religion,  and  established  by  reason  in  art,  science  and 
philosophy,  is  the  ultimate  goal  of  man’s  earthly  en- 
deavor. All  processes  of  thought,  from  sense-percep- 
tion to  reason,  are  but  processes  of  establishing  unity 
in  and  thru  diversity,  are  but  modes  of  satisfying  the 
craving  of  the  soul  for  touch  with  ultimate  reality,  with 
the  life  that  binds  the  seemingly  chaotic  world  into 
orderly  system. 

The  teacher’s  world  is  no  less  a world  of  diversity 
to  be  ordered  into  the  unity  of  a single  life-principle. 
So  many  details  and  duties,  even  within  the  limits  of  a 
daily  program!  And  when  the  entire  scope  of  educa- 
tion is  considered — its  aim,  processes,  and  instrumen- 
talities— the  whole  to  be  unified  is  coextensive  with  the 


16] 


world  of  thought  and  reality.  Here,  as  elsewhere,  the 
desire  for  unity  is  the  impulse  to  thought — for  unity  of 
the  infinite  diversity  in  the  educative  process.  All  edu- 
cational discussions  are  based  on  the  assumption  and 
prompted  by  the  faith  that  there  is  a unifying  principle 
which  organizes  and  systematizes  the  distracting  variety 
of  details  in  the  process  of  education. 

But,  while  in  such  discussions  there  is  tacit  recog- 
nition of  the  unity  of  the  educative  process,  there  is 
generally  lacking  the  firm  conviction  that  the  complex 
process  of  education  can  be  reduced  to  the  unity  of  a 
single  principle.  Even  Rosenkranz,  in  the  introduction 
to  his  Philosophy  of  Education , affirms  that  “the  science 
of  education  cannot  be  deduced  from  a single  principle 
with  such  strictness  as  logic,  ethics,  and  like  sciences,” 
but  that  “it  is  rather  a mixed  science,  having  its  pre- 
suppositions in  many  others;”  and  that  “education  is 
capable  of  no  such  exact  definitions  of  its  principles  as 
other  sciences.”  And  at  present  I see  it  emphasized 
that  education  is  an  applied  science,  in  the  sense  that 
it  is  formed  by  the  application  of  other  sciences;  thus 
implying  that  it  has  no  germinant  idea  of  its  own. 

Certainly,  education  avails  itself  of  all  the  other 
sciences,  as  these  do  of  it;  but  the  science  of  education 
goes  forth  in  its  own  right  and  organizes  all  the  sciences 
from  its  own  creative  center.  It  has  its  own  single, 
central  principle,  which  orders  all  the  details  of  the 
complex  process  into  a unified  and  harmonious  whole; 
and  this  principle  is  self-activity.  The  science  of  edu- 
cation must  show  how  the  whole  process  is  implied  in 
this  principle,  while  the  art  of  education  is  but  the  appli- 
cation of  the  principle  thus  implied.  Since  the  ultimate 
principle  of  any  science  is  the  ultimate  principle  of  every 
other,  education  is  not  distinguished  by  its  ultimate 
principle  from  other  sciences,  but  only  in  the  applica- 
tion of  it.  Since  this  principle  is  a universal  one,  its 
application  yields  a philosophy  of  education  rather  than 
[7] 


a science.  How  ft  does  this  will  best  appear  under  the 
threefold  aspect  of  the  principle  as  it  distinctly  appears 
in  the  process  of  education. 

i.  This  principle  appears  primarily  as  tension  be- 
tween the  real  and  the  ideal — the  actual  and  the  po- 
tential. 

Since  the  universe  is  alive  and  not  dead,  moving 
and  not  fixed,  this  principle  is  universal.  We  live  in 
a seeking,  searching,  surging  world.  There  is  constant 
striving  for  that  which  does  not  yet  appear.  Every  ob- 
ject has  a dual  nature — something  within  it  which  tends 
to  destroy  its  present  form  of  existence  and  bring  it 
nearer  to  the  reality  of  the  nature  which  constitutes  it. 
Any  thing  imposes  limitations  upon  itself  which  the 
thing  will  not  rest  under.  The  hills,  rock-ribbed  and 
ancient  as  the  sun,  the  planets,  and  the  infinite  hosts  of 
heaven,  are  ever  seeking  new  conditions  thru  the  infinite 
of  space  and  time. 

In  the  organic  world  stress  thru  duality  of  nature 
is  unmistakable.  The  plant  or  the  animal  is  moved  to 
self-realization  by  a resident  force.  In  each  case  the 
object  is  in  self-struggle.  An  organic  thing  is  organic 
by  virtue  of  the  stress  between  its  actual  and  its  poten- 
tial nature,  by  virtue  of  the  relation  between  the  real 
and  the  ideal  which  constitutes  its  nature.  The  ideal  is 
ever  striving  for  its  freedom  in  the  real — to  become  it- 
self the  real. 

Man  emerges  out  of  the  lower  order  of  beings  on 
becoming  conscious  of  the  duality  of  his  nature;  of  the 
divergence  between  his  real  and  his  ideal  self;  between 
what  he  is  and  what  he  ought  to  be.  He  can  lay  hold 
upon  his  better  self,  and  by  conscious  plan  and  purpose 
aid  in  his  own  self-realization.  He  knows  that  what  he 
is,  in  his  present  actualized  self,  is  not  what  he  really  is 
by  virtue  of  his  manhood;  and,  feeling  this  discrepancy, 
he  is  consciously  self-moved  to  realize  his  implicit  man- 
hood. Conscious  self-activity  is  the  ultimate  retreat  of 


[8] 


self-consciousness;  and  from  this  single  truth  springs 
everything  within  the  realm  of  human  thought  and 
action. 

Herein  is  involved  the  whole  of  the  religious  life. 
Coming  to  consciousness  of  the  better  self  is  the  second 
birth  of  the  soul.  Truly  man  must  be  born  again,  in 
order  simply  to  be  a man;  and  the  whole  of  his  life  is 
but  a succession  of  new  births,  in  each  of  which  man 
discerns  deeper  realities  in  his  own  soul.  Herein  man 
discovers  God.  ‘‘Religion  is  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul 
of  man.”  In  the  conscious  relation  of  the  two  selves 
lies  the  fact  of  sin  and  redemption.  From  this  relation 
arises  the  possibility  of  man’s  going  to  heaven' or  hell. 
One  not  accustomed  to  think  on  this  fact  of  self-con- 
sciousness will  be  surprised  to  find  that  all  the  doctrines 
of  the  Bible  are  explained  by  it;  and,  more,  that  it  is 
the  simple  truth  which  has  shaped  the  world’s  great  re- 
ligions. The  Protestant  Reformation  was  but  a clearer 
recognition  of  the  voice  of  the  better  self.  This  was 
the  simple  principle  that  dethroned  kings  and  gave  us 
democracy.  To  secure  the  rule  of  the  better  self  is  the 
desideratum  of  all  governments.  And  so  all  moral 
duties  are  determined  by  the  relation  of  the  present, 
real  self  to  the  ideal  self.  Out  of  this  come  conscience, 
duty,  responsibility,  obligation,  and  the  rest.  Man’s 
duty  is  simple;  he  ought  to  be  what  he  is;  that  is,  what 
he  is  by  virtue  of  being  a man.  If  he  is  really  a devil, 
he  can  do  no  better  than  to  play  the  game  well. 

In  education  this  principle  determines  the  end  to 
be  that  of  self-realization — the  realization  of  the  better 
self.  Man  is  the  product  of  his  own  educative  process. 
Education  cannot  be  ultimately  tested  in  any  form  of 
external  product;  as,  in  what  a man  has  or  knows,  but 
in  what  he  is;  thus  making  culture,  in  the  true  sense, 
the  final  aim.  Nations  have  taken  two  views  of  the 
meaning  of  education;  regarding  it  either  as  a means 
or  as  an  end.  The  history  of  education  can,  therefore, 


[9] 


be  read  only  in  terms  of  the  relation  under  question. 

Not  only  the  aim  but  the  method  of  education  is 
thus  determined.  At  every  stroke  of  the  teacher  some 
present  stress  must  be  released,  and  some  new  ideal 
born;  some  new  stress  set  up.  The  art  of  teaching  con- 
sists at  bottom  in  discerning  the  present  stress  of  the 
life  to  be  educated,  and  transforming  it  into  a higher 
one.  The  whole  question  of  interest  lies  here.  A child 
is  always  interested,  and  interested  in  something  worthy. 
The  teacher  is  not  so  much  to  induce  interest  as  to 
mediate  it.  To  educate  is  to  move  the  life  onward  and 
upward  under  the  stress  of  ideals.  The  fundamental 
thought  of  method  in  education  is  this  of  the  ideal  pass- 
ing into  the  real,  that  a new  ideal  may  be  revealed, 
which  in  turn  becomes  real.  The  perfection  of  charac- 
ter sought  in  education  is  not  an  end  to  be  attained,  but 
an  infinite  progression  by  mediating  ideals.  Wherever 
teaching  is  found  to  be  dead,  it  is  because  the  teacher 
strives  to  induce  action  from  without,  instead  of  utiliz- 
ing the  self-activity  of  the  pupil.  Witness,  for  example, 
the  dire  distress  of  the  teacher  in  striving  to  secure  oral 
or  written  expression  from  the  pupil  when  there  is  no 
inner  motive  to  expression. 

Thus  “interest”  expresses  the  tension  between  the 
real  and  the  ideal  in  life;  while  that  other  great  word 
“apperception”  expresses  the  passing  of  the  ideal  into 
the  real,  on  the  basis  of  its  relation  to  the  real.  In  the 
same  way  must  be  explained  those  other  current  terms 
of  “correlation”  and  “concentration.”  Each  subject  of 
study  is  but  a construction  of  the  world  under  a given 
tension  of  life.  Subjects  have  no  external,  fixed  bound- 
aries, thus  becoming  mutually  exclusive.  The  failure 
to  recognize  this  truth  is  a never-failing  source  of  trouble, 
causing  the  teacher  to  resort  to  all  sorts  of  schemes  to 
correlate  subjects  and  parts  of  subjects. 

For  instance,  man  considered  in  effort  to  realize 
himself  thru  his  physical  environment,  in  the  form  of 

[10] 


the  industrial  world,  forms  geography;  and,  when  more 
fully  specialized,  the  sciences.  The  field  is  limited  only 
by  what  is  required  to  this  end;  there  is  no  objective 
limit,  and  no  matter  reserved  for  the  use  of  any  other 
subject.  History  is  formed  by  viewing  man  in  effort  to 
realize  himself  by  means  of  his  fellow-man  thru  institu- 
tions. For  this  purpose  it  may  use  all  the  material  gone 
over  by  geography.  Number  arises  from  man’s  effort 
to  adjust  himself  accurately  and  economically  to  some 
ideal  end;  and  is  thus  a process  of  self-realization. 
Grammar,  in  treating  the  sentence,  exhibits  man  in  the 
explicit  act  of  passing  from  his  real  to  his  ideal  self, 
inasmuch  as  the  subject  of  every  sentence  expresses 
man’s  real  self,  and  the  predicate  his  ideal;  while  the 
verb  expresses  the  tension  between  the  two.  Literature 
has  for  its  direct  purpose  the  revelation  of  the  ideal  self 
in  the  real.  Thus  every  subject  is  born  of  some  phase 
of  the  life-tension;  some  outgoing  effort  to  self-realiza- 
tion. It  is  just  this  living  and  determining  factor  that 
gives  the  clue  to  the  teaching  of  every  subject;  so  reveals 
its  inner  life  and  organization  as  to  insure  vital  teaching 
as  against  mechanical  teaching. 

And  when  we  pass  to  the  school  as  the  organized 
instrument  of  education,  we  discern  the  same  germin- 
ant  principle.  All  institutions  are  but  projections  of  the 
ideal  self  in  an  objective  form  as  a means  to  making  the 
ideal  real.  Man,  being  conscious  of  himself,  can  be 
teacher  to  himself  as  pupil.  The  teacher-and-pupil  re- 
lation is  first  a subjective  one.  The  teacher  is  the  pupil’s 
own  ideal  adopted  as  a more  efficient  means  of  the 
pupil’s  development.  From  this  center  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  school  organization  and  management  arises. 
There  can  be  no  successful  school  management  without 
recognition  of  this  fact. 

2.  In  the  process  of  education  this  principle  of 
self-activity  assumes  a second  form — tension  between 
subject  and  object. 


[U] 


In  the  process  of  self-realization  man  does  not 
simply  hold  his  ideal  in  consciousness,  but  forgets  him- 
self in  the  objective  world.  The  law  of  self-realization, 
as  disclosed  above,  is  by  the  law  of  self-sacrifice.  Altru- 
ism is  the  method  of  egoism. 

Everything  lives  in  and  thru  another.  Man  intu- 
itively feels  that  his  life  is  found  in  the  world  about 
him;  he  is  instinctively  drawn  to  that  world.  This  is 
explained  by  the  fact  that  every  self  is  the  organic  unity 
between  this  self  and  the  other  self.  If  at  this  moment 
one  should  say  “I,”  and  then  read  some  poem  not  be- 
fore read,  the  old  / becomes  a new  one,  which  includes 
the  poem.  And  thus  with  any  other  object  of  thought. 
The  / is  not  the  barren  and  abstract  self,  but  always  in- 
cludes something  other.  What  before  appeared  as  ten- 
sion between  the  real  and  the  ideal  now  appears  as  ten- 
sion between  subject  and  object.  The  ideal  which  the 
mind  seeks  is  the  thought  and  spirit  of  the  world  which 
is  objective  to  it.  Subject  and  object  implies  a self- 
active principle  which  differentiates  itself  into  the  po- 
larity of  this  and  the  other. 

And  here  we  have  a new  aspect  of  the  germinant 
principle  of  education.  All  thought  is  to  cancel  the 
distinction  between  the  subject — the  real  self,  and  the 
object — the  ideal  self;  and  the  motive  in  the  process  is 
to  break  down  the  limitations  which  the  object  imposes 
on  the  subject.  Subjects  of  study  are  so  many  enlarge- 
ments of  the  self.  These  are  taught  that  the  pupil  may 
have  life,  and  that  more  abundantly.  Knowledge  is  the 
means  by  which  the  finite  self  passes  toward  the  infinite 
self.  The  pupil  masters  a subject,  and  may  say,  “I  am 
that  subject,  and  that,  and  that;”  and  if  he  could  master 
all,  he  could  exclaim  with  Jehovah,  “I  am.” 

Not  only  the  motive,  but  the  problem  of  method 
lies  in  the  connection  between  subject  and  object.  The 
mind  and  its  object  must  be  reduced  to  common  terms. 
The  objective  process  in  things  must  be  seen  as  the  sub- 

[12] 


jective  process  in  thought.  The  percept,  the  concept, 
the  judgment,  and  the  syllogism  are  but  processes  of 
unity  between  the  subject  and  the  object;  and  no  in- 
telligent discussion  of  these  can  be  made  except  by 
recognizing  them  as  common' processes  of  subject  and 
object.  If  by  reasoning,  for  instance,  one  forms  a judg- 
ment, from  the  nature  of  an  orange,  that  all  oranges  are 
yellow,  it  is  because  the  oranges  themselves  form  their 
yellow  in  the  same  way.  The  process  of  reducing  a 
compound  to  a simple  fraction  is  the  process  of  the 
fraction  itself.  Thus  the  problem  of  method  in  teach- 
ing is  the  problem  of  reducing  the  learner  and  the  ob- 
ject to  be  learned  to  a common  process — to  a unity  of 
life. 

3.  But  in  the  process  of  teaching  this  principle 
takes  a third  and  final  form,  namely,  tension  between 
the  universal  and  the  individual,  or  between  the  creative 
energy  and  its  object. 

What  the  student  is  immediately  striving  for  is  the 
unity  of  the  world  of  isolated  objects.  But  he  cannot 
establish  this  unity  by  directly  relating  them.  Things 
are  unified  thru  their  common  creative  energy.  Oak 
trees  are  not  primarily  united  in  space,  but  in  an  oak 
nature  — energy  — which  produces  them.  The  energy 
which  produces  one  produces  another,  etc.;  and  in  this 
creative  act  all  are  one.  Events  are  unified  in  a common 
life  below  them,  as  implied  in  the  word  “event.”  Hence 
the  unity  sought  is  the  unity  of  the  object  with  its 
nature,  or  productive  energy.  In  every  act  or  thought 
one  object  is  divided  into  its  individual  and  its  univer- 
sal aspects.  Thinking  is  relating;  and  the  relation 
sought  is  always  the  two  aspects  of  the  object,  as  above 
indicated.  This  is  the  simple  but  universal  law  of 
thought. 

But  note  the  real  object  of  this  vital  process  of 
thought.  It  was  stated  in  discussing  the  tension  be- 
tween subject  and  object  that  the  purpose  of  thought 
[13] 


is  to  bring  the  thinker  into  unity  with  the  object  thought. 
This  can  be  done  only  by  the  thinker  discerning  the 
creative  energy  of  the  object.  On  this  ground  only  can 
they  meet.  On  the  plane  of  sense-perception  there 
seems  to  be  an  impassable  gulf  between  the  thinker  and 
the  object.  This  separation  grows  less  and  less  as  the 
higher  processes  of  thought  are  exercised.  In  fact,  such 
processes  are  higher  because  they  bring  the  thinker  into 
closer  unity  with  the  object  thought.  The  thinker  must 
find  himself  in  the  object,  but  this  is  just  the  self-active 
principle  in  the  object.  The  thinker  craves  the  rein- 
forcement of  the  object’s  inner  life,  and  is  thus  prompted 
to  search  out  its  genetic  principle. 

It  thus  appears  that  tension  between  an  object  and 
its  creative  energy  is  one  with  the  tension  between  the 
real  and  ideal,  described  at  the  outset.  Thus  the  circle 
is  complete.  The  three  tensions  are  but  so  many  aspects 
of  one  life-movement.  These  three  aspects  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  self-activity  determine  all  phases  and  processes 
of  school  work  — fix  the  aim,  determine  the  methods, 
construct  the  course  of  study,  and  organize  and  manage 
the  school.  And,  what  is  of  the  greatest  significance, 
the  following  of  this  principle  brings  all  school  work 
into  conscious  and  organic  relation  to  every  other  educa- 
tional force — the  church,  the  state,  etc.  All  move  under 
the  same  principle  to  the  same  end — the  full  realization 
of  all  the  beauty  and  worth  implicit  in  human  nature. 
— Delivered  before  the  National  Superintendents'  Associa- 
tion, at  Columbus , Ohio,  Feb.  23 , i8gg. 

No  man  ever  had  a clearer  view  of  his  fundamental 
conception  of  life  than  did  Dr.  Tompkins.  None  ever 
applied  his  conception  more  thoroughly  to  the  details 
of  his  chosen  vocation.  And  none  ever  made  a less  me- 
chanical application.  With  him  theory  and  practice 
were  one,  each  growing  out  of  the  other. 

While  it  is  to  be  so  greatly  regretted  that  he  was 
not  permitted  to  write  a philosophy  of  education,  yet 

[14] 


in  his  three  books  he  left  a well-rounded  system  of  ed- 
ucational thought.  “The  Philosophy  of  Teaching”  is 
an  elaboration  of  the  three  Tensions  as  they  appear 
in  the  school  as  a Spiritual  Organism.  “The  Philos- 
ophy of  School  Management”  treats  the  school  as  an 
external,  Organized  Means  to  the  Spiritual  End.  “The 
Science  of  Discourse”  illustrates  the  Process  of  Self- 
realization  through  the  school. 

The  school  as  to  both  organization  and  movement 
consists  of  related  unities:  Unity  in  the  lesson,  in  the 
subject,  and  in  the  class,  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
the  unity  of  each  pupil  with  the  teacher,  who,  by  ob- 
jectification, is  the  pupil’s  possible  or  ideal  self.  This 
relation  of  pupil  and  teacher  is  sought  in  order  to  ob- 
tain unity  in  the  life  of  the  individual  taught — the  aim 
the  school  has  in  common  with  the  other  institutions. 
All  the  unities  are  evolved  out  of  the  first  Tension,  the 
primary  unity,  for  the  sake  of  better  and  more  rapid 
development  in  the  child,  and  through  the  process  of 
teaching  all  turn  back  into  it  as  so  much  realization  of 
what  was  potential  in  him. 

The  second  Tension — the  unity  of  subject  and  ob- 
ject— places  the  subject-matter  taught  under  a double 
relation.  Primarily  it  is  the  embodiment  of  a truth,  a 
law,  a principle,  that  is  translatable  into  spiritual  life. 
Secondly,  it  is  the  meeting  ground  of  pupil-mind  and 
teacher-mind;  is  the  means  in  and  by  which  the 
teacher  stimulates  the  pupil  into  unity  with  him  in 
thought.  Thus  the  pupil  comes  into  unity  with  his 
teacher  and  with  his  potential  self  through  his  con- 
scious effort  to  discover  the  thought  relations  in  the 
object  studied. 

This  double  relation  requires  of  the  teacher, — (i) 
the  conscious  analysis  of  the  experience  gained  from 
his  own  study  of  the  given  subject,  as  a guide  in  direct- 
ing the  pupil’s  mental  process  in  rising  to  the  same  ex. 
perience;  (2)  the  selection  of  suitable  devices  for  the 
[15] 


stimulation  of  this  movement  in  the  pupil;  and  (3)  the 
conception  of  the  experience,  both  as  process  and  pro- 
duct, in  terms  of  the  ultimate  process  in  life. 

The  third  Tension — the  tension  between  creative 
energy  and  its  object,  under  which  the  world  is  evolv- 
ing, determines  externally  the  thought  process  by 
which  the  human  mind  identifies  itself  with  the  thought 
in  things.  This  process  the  psychological  factor  in  ed- 
ucation modifies  from  the  subjective  side. 

With  a firm  belief  in  the  unity  of  creation,  and  in 
obedience  to  the  two  factors,  “The  Philosophy  of 
Teaching,”  in  determining  the  process  of  thinking, 
seeks  (1)  to  know  Nature’s  method  in  producing  its 
objects,  and  (2)  to  reduce  this  process  to  terms  of 
mental  life,  which  is  possible  because  the  laws  of 
thinking  and  the  mode  of  existence  in  things  are  the 
same. 

It  is  found  that  Nature  has  but  one  process,  the 
process  of  becoming;  Nature  is  synthetic  only.  But 
man,  who  is  psychological  as  well  as  logical,  is  analytic 
and  synthetic,  always  so  in  interpretation  and  in  lan- 
guage expression.  However,  his  analysis  is  but  a 
means  to  synthesis;  synthesis  is  his  aim.  This  process 
in  things,  by  psychological  analysis  falls  into  four 
thought  processes  — Description,  Narration,  Exposi- 
tion, and  Argumentation — based  upon  the  particular 
relation  under  which  the  object  is  viewed.  These  are 
four  modes  by  which  unity  of  subject  and  object  is  se- 
cured. Rather  the  mode,  for  an  object  is  not  fully 
known  until  it  has  been  viewed  in  the  four  ways.  The 
four  processes  are  worked  out  in  detail  on  the  basis  of 
the  relation  of  creative  energy  to  its  object. 

“The  Philosophy  of  School  Management”  is  an 
expansion  of  a chapter  which  originally  appeared  in 
“The  Philosophy  of  Teaching.”  It  treats  the  school 
from  the  side  of  organized  means  in  making  actual 
teaching  effective.  It  does  not  pretend  to  give  a cata- 

[161 


log  of  “do’s  and  do  not’s,  which  may  serve  the  mere 
operative  in  a factory,  where  the  material  conditions 
remain  fixed,”  but  seeks  instead  to  place  the  teacher  in 
position  to  be  “guided  by  a principle  which  tact  and 
ingenuity  may  apply  to  each  new  case  as  it  arises.”  In 
it  the  Law  of  Unity  laid  down  in  “The  Philosophy  of 
Teaching”  is  made  the  basis  for  systematic  discussion 
of  the  problems  that  confront  the  school,  from  adjust- 
ment of  teacher’s  salary  to  definition  of  the  relations 
and  duties  of  parent,  board  of  education  and  superin- 
tendent; to  the  selection  of  the  teacher,  and  the  act 
of  teaching.  The  following  from  the  section  on  Select- 
ing the  Teacher  is  typical  of  the  fundamental  and  di- 
rect manner  in  which  all  discussion  is  made: — 

“This  [selecting  the  teacher],  aside  from  the  act 
of  teaching,  is  the  most  critical  function  of  the  organ- 
ism. The  one  held  responsible  for  this  duty  must 
know,  in  a scientific  and  professional  way,  the  neces- 
sary qualifications  of  a teacher;  and  besides,  must  have 
that  devotion  to  the  pupil  which  makes  him  firm 
against  the  importunities  of  the  unqualified,  whether 
they  be  relatives,  friends,  or  home  or  foreign  talent. 
There  is  but  one  law,  and  this  requires  that  the  best 
available  teacher  be  secured.” 

Dr.  Tompkins’s  philosophy  made  him  equally 
strong  in  logical  thinking,  in  his  appreciation  of  the 
beautiful,  and  in  practical  life,  because  to  him  these 
three  were  one.  To  him  the  true,  and  it  only,  is  both 
beautiful  and  good;  the  beautiful  is  true  and  good;  the 
good  is  true  and  beautiful.  In  essential  nature  they 
are  the  same,  the  difference  depending  upon  whether 
the  intellect,  the  sensibility  or  the  will  interprets  the 
relation  between  creative  energy  and  its  object.  A 
true  man  he  defined  as  one  in  which  the  real  man  cor- 
responds exactly  to  the  idea  man.  If  he  felt  that  the 
idea  man  was  not  constrained  by  the  real,  such  a life 
was  beautiful.  “A  good  man,”  he  said,  “is  one  who  is 
[17] 


fulfilling  the  purpose  of  his  being." 

It  is  only  through  analysis  that  he  found  three 
ends  in  life;  synthesis  leaves  but  one  So  long  as  there 
is  mere  coordination  organization  is  incomplete.  In 
his  philosophy  productive  activity,  resulting  ultimately 
in  goodness  or  virtue  as  the  supreme  end  in  life  sub- 
sumes the  other  ends. 

The  function  of  knowing  is  to  rationalize  human 
activity;  therefore  truth  is  known  only  in  terms  of 
some  end  translatable  into  terms  of  goodness,  the  end 
in  human  effort.  This  is  the  prime  significance  he 
gave  to  the  second  Tension.  In  his  interpretation  of 
the  third  Tension  he  insisted  that  the  isolated  fact 
does  not  exhibit  truth,  for  truth  is  found  only  in  the 
process,  and  that  it  is  known  to  be  truth  only  through 
the  product— when  the  product  is  true. 

The  Beautiful,  upon  which  he  loved  so  well  to  dis- 
course, he  defined  as  presenting  an  ideal  as  realized ; and 
as  having  its  end  in  the  emotions.  But  by  this  he  meant 
the  immediate  or  conscious  end,  not  the  ultimate  one. 
For  he  said  also  that  one  grows  into  the  likeness  of 
the  thing  he  makes  his  ideal;  and  that  a man  acts  out 
of  the  fullness  of  his  life. 

Thus  a man’s  whole  life  should  be  brought  to  bear 
in  every  act  of  thinking,  feeling,  and  willing,  which  is 
exactly  what  he  meant  by  “intensive  living,”  and  by 
“keeping  the  child  who  e-souled  in  every  act  of  teach- 
ing.” 

However  brief  an  outline  of  Dr.  Tompkins’s  phil- 
osophy may  be  his  fine  sense  of  humor  can  not  be 
omitted,  for,  while  it  furnished  a play-spell  for  the  soul, 
it  came  as  a necessity  in  the  unfolding  of  his  philos- 
ophy, and  not  as  a mere  by-product. 

It  will  be  recalled  that  his  philosophy  starts  with 
an  instinctive  faith  in  the  unity  of  the  Universe.  In  his 
search  for  this  unity  it  was  necessary  to  bring  very 
diverse  things  and  elements  together.  In  this  process 

[18J 


the  incongruous  was  forced  upon  him  along  with  the 
congruous.  He  came  to  see  that  in  order  to  know  the 
congruous  one  must  observe  the  incongruity,  and  vice 
versa , the  incongruity  is  often  most  potent  in  the  dis- 
covery of  the  truth,  and  especially  so  in  presenting  and 
emphasizing  it.  The  function  of  legitimate  humor 
he  explained  by  the  law  of  opposites,  by  which  tall  is 
known  only  in  its  relation  to  short,  by  which  there  is  no 
positive  pole  to  the  magnet  without  a negative.  His 
use  of  humor  in  discourse  grew  out  of  its  necessity  in 
thinking. 

He  maintained  that  the  teacher  who  has  no  sense 
of  humor  sees  the  truth  but  partially,  and  is  weak  in 
ability  to  organize  and  execute,  because  he  fails  to 
make  proper  distinction  between  fundamental  and 
superficial  relations;  and  for  the  same  reason  is  slow  to 
discover  error. 

But  after  all  else  is  considered,  those  who  knew 
Dr.  Tompkins  personally  loved  him  best  as  a friend 
and  for  his  manhood.  He  was  possessed  with  an  in- 
tense feeling  of  sympathy  and  tenderness  for  his  fel- 
low-man in  the  life  struggle.  Any  sacrifice  of  self  ap- 
peared insignificant  to  him.  And  greatest  of  all  was 
his  sympathy  for  the  wrongdoer.  Most  men  feel  sorry 
for  the  one  who  loses  the  horse;  he  felt  sorriest  for  the 
thief.  The  loss  of  the  horse  is  small;  the  loss  of  the 
man  is  irreparable.  He  was  always  sympathetically 
conscious  of  the  duality  in  the  life  of  each  individual; 
that  “man  knows  a baseness  in  his  blood,  at  such 
strange  war  with  something  good  he  cannot  do  the 
thing  he  would.”  This  sympathy  made  him  patient 
and  forbearing,  almost  to  a fault  at  times.  But  if  he 
erred  in  this  respect  it  was  in  the  right  direction  and 
we  loved  him  the  better  for  the  error.  Those  who 
were  closely  associated  with  him  feel  that  in  his  own 
person  he  demonstrated  that  truly  “Altruism  is  the 
method  of  egoism.” 

[19] 


He  loved.  He  never  hated.  It  has  been  said  of 
Emerson  and  Carlyle  that  “there  was  not  much  differ- 
ence between  them  after  all,  for  Emerson  loved  the 
good  and  Carlyle  hated  the  bad.”  Dr.  Tompkins  was 
clearly  on  the  side  of  Emerson.  And  greatest  of  all  his 
loves  was  his  love  for  the  earnest  teacher  in  whose 
behalf,  through  his  chosen  vocation,  he  gave  his  best 
energy  and  the  whole  of  his  life. 

He  loved  justice  because  he  loved  truth,  of  which 
justice  is  one  form.  He  hated  injustice  by  loving  jus- 
tice the  more  intensely. 

His  fidelity  to  truth,  as  his  best  insight  presented 
it  to  him,  could  not  be  shaken.  When  he  acted  his 
act  was  based  on  a fundamental  law  of  life  as  the  sole 
guide,  so  that  the  work  should  be  best  done,  and  done 
once  and  for  all.  Such  application  of  law  and  prin- 
ciple was  not  mechanical;  he  did  not  control  the  prin- 
ciple so  much  as  the  principle  controlled  him,  for  he 
could  use  a law  only  when  it  had  become  systemic,  so 
that  the  act  should  come  as  the  natural  thing  to  do. 
The  control  of  the  act  by  fundamental  principle,  he  be- 
lieved, unites  the  highest  manhood,  the  truest  states- 
manship, and,  ultimately,  the  most  practical  politics. 

He  has  withdrawn  in  person  from  the  battle  of  life 
here  on  earth,  leaving  the  struggle  to  be  carried  on  by 
those  who  remain.  And,  stimulated  afresh  when  in  re- 
trospect we  view  the  man  and  his  art,  the  man  and  his 
philosophy,  and  when  man,  philosophy,  and  art  fuse 
before  us,  our  blood  quickens  for  the  fray,  and  we 
pledge  anew  our  faith  in  the  closing  thought  in  the  in- 
troduction to  “The  Philosophy  of  Teaching”: — 

“It  has  been  said  that  philosophy  can  bake  no 
bread,  but  that  she  can  secure  to  us  God  and  immor- 
tality. This  ought  to  be  sufficient.  But  she  can  bake 
bread,  and  must  do  so  or  miss  God  and  immortality. 
To  secure  heaven  she  must  mix  with  the  daily  affairs 
of  earth;  and  while  searching  out  God  and  immortality, 
must  bring  counsel  and  comfort  to  the  day-laborer  in 
the  school-room.” 


[20] 


A TRIBUTE  TO 


ARNOLD  TOMPKINS 

By  PSESIDENT  G.  R.  GLENN, 

North  Georgia  Agricultural  College 


The  announcement  of  his  death  was  a great  shock  to  his  friends  in 
Georgia.  Just  a few  days  before  he  was  stricken  he  was  lecturing  to  the 
teachers  in  our  University  Summer  School  at  Athens,  apparently  in  the 
full  vigor  of  physical  manhood,  and  in  the  complete  enjoyment  of  all  of 
his  spiritual  powers.  Few  of  us  dreamed  as  he  talked  so  earnestly, 
that  this  message  was  to  be  his  last.  As  we  now  recall  his  glowing 
words  and  picture  his  earnest  face,  we  look  at  each  other  and  ask  in 
whispered  cadence  “did  not  our  hearts  burn  within  us  while  he  talked?” 
For  days  we  had  followed  him  as  he  led  in  those  far  reaching  excur- 
sions in  History,  Literature,  Philosophy,  Science  and  Art,  and  saw  him 
at  the  end  of  each  journey,  with  a master’s  hand,  throw  a flash  light  on 
the  truth  for  which  we  had  been  searching.  Who  of  us  can  forget  his 
radiant  face  and  majestic  form  as  he  stood  in  the  closing  moments  of 
that  last  hour  and  said:  “My  friends,  it  is  the  truth  and  the  truth  alone 
that  can  break  the  fetters  of  our  ignorance  and  set  us  free.” 

When  I first  saw  him  ten  years  ago,  I was  drawn  to  him  and  loved 
him.  When  I first  heard  him  speak  I said,  there  is  a man  who  has  a 
message  that  it  is  worth  while  to  hear.  He  had  a message  with  love  in  it ; 
and  the  truth  was  in  it;  and  the  beautiful  was  in  it;  and  it  was  good  to 
hear  him.  He  was  one  of  those  rare  souls  that  had  wrought  out  his  own 
way  of  making  his  thoughts  attractive,  and  he  stamped  upon  every  pro- 
duct of  his  brain  the  mint  marks  of  his  genius. 

Like  every  other  great  teacher,  his  ambition  was  to  find  something 
that  is  true  and  that  is  worth  while,  and  then  give  it  and  give  it  gladly  to 
every  human  soul.  It  is  said  that  none  of  the  best  headwork  nor  the 
best  heartwork  of  this  world  is  ever  paid  for.  Indeed,  the  man  wTho 
brings  fire  from  heaven  must  sometimes,  even  to  this  day,  pay  the  pen- 
alty in  chains.  It  is  the  tragedy  of  the  race  that  the  man  who  achieves 


best  and  contributes  most  for  his  kind  is  little  understood  until  his  work 
is  done.  Dr.  Tompkins  had  the  rare  good  fortune  to  be  loved  and,  in 
part  at  least,  understood  in  his  lifetime.  In  his  professional  work  espe- 
cially, he  so  simplified  and  illumined  his  thought  that  the  wayfarer  in  the 
profession  could  understand  him. 

I shall  never  forget  his  first  visit  to  Georgia  to  conduct  an  institute 
in  an  out-of-the-way  section  in  the  piney  woods.  There  were  assembled 
in  a country  church  one  hundred  and  fifty  teachers  who  had  come  from 
as  many  sparsely  scattered  schools  in  the  pine  barrens.  They  were,  for 
the  most  part,  young  people  without  much  education  and  little  or  no 
professional  training.  They  were  timid  and  shrinking  and  silent,  and 
they  wore  on  their  faces  a questioning  suspicion  that  untutored  folk  can 
not  conceal  in  the  presence  of  a stranger.  Many  of  them  were  there 
because  the  law  compelled  them  to  come;  but  many  were  also  present 
because  they  hungered  for  better  things  than  they  knew.  They  were 
all  needy  and  very  ignorant.  The  situation  was  an  interesting  one  and 
the  question  arose,  what  would  he  do  with  it?  Dr.  Tompkins  knew 
science,  philosophy,  literature,  history  and  art,  but  he  knew  something 
that  is  better  worth  knowing  than  all  these.  He  knew  folks.  He  knew 
all  sorts  of  folks.  He  knew  where  and  when  and  how  to  touch  and  stir 
the  human  heart.  More  than  this  he  knew  how  to  bestow  what  he  knew 
where  it  would  revive  and  feed  and  heal.  In  ten  minutes  from  his 
opening  sentence  he  was  in  complete  command  of  that  presence.  His 
radiant  spirit  had  warmed  and  illumined  the  very  atmosphere  of  the 
room  and  every  heart  in  that  company  was  in  touch  with  his  own.  He 
was  in  every  one  of  those  hundred  and  fifty  school  houses  at  the  same 
moment  standing  with  every  teacher,  breaking  the  bread  of  life  for  all 
of  those  groups  of  thirty  or  forty  children  and  feeding  the  hungry  little 
ones  until  they  were  all  filled.  It  was  the  miracle  of  the  loaves  and 
fishes  repeated  over  and  over  again.  By  the  end  of  the  week  he  was  to 
all  that  company  of  teachers  a fellow  teacher,  brother,  friend. 

Real  teaching  power  will  be  recognized  by  the  unlearned  as  well  as 
the  wise.  It  works  miracles  today  as  it  did  of  old.  In  the  order  of  time 
it  feeds  and  heals  first  and  then  enlightens. 

It  know’s  how  to  minister  to  the  neediest.  It  always  has  been  and 
always  will  be  the  most  potent  energy  in  the  world.  It  is  not  man- 
made; it  is  God-given  power.  It  works  according  to  God  Almighty’s 
law.  It  lives  and  grows  and  comes  into  fruitage  on  the  very  foundations 
of  death.  It  works  noiselessly  and  mysteriously,  but  it  moves  with  un- 
swerving certainty.  When  the  Master  Teacher  would  explain  its  pro- 
cess he  said  to  those  he  was  training,  “Consider  the  lilies  of  the  field, 
how  they  grow.”  When  he  would  enjoin  a faithful  and  complete  conse- 
cration to  its  high  and  holy  mission  he  said  to  these  same  disciples,  with 
emphasis  three  times  repeated,  “Feed  my  lambs.” 

Arnold  Tompkins  had  real  teaching  power.  He  believed  that  his 


power  must  be  tested  always  and  at  last  not  so  much  by  what  he  could 
do  with  his  best  pupil  as  by  what  he  could  do  with  his  worst.  He  rec- 
ognized the  mind  of  a child  as  a thing  that  grows;  that  it  is  under  the 
laws  fixed  for  the  direction  and  control  of  all  growing  things.  The 
Creator  has  made  the  same  laws  of  growth  for  all  the  kingdom.  The 
man  who  can  understand  how  a plant  grows  can  also  understand  how 
the  mind  and  the  spirit  grows.  All  things  that  grow  must  first  be  fed 
with  nourishing  food.  They  must  live  in  an  environment  suitable  for 
conveying  food  supplies.  For  a plant  environment  is  made  up  of  soil, 
moisture,  air  and  light.  For  a child,  environment  is  made  up  of  home, 
school,  church,  society,  etc.  Environment  is  a controllable  thing,  and 
therefore  heredity,  whether  of  good  or  evil,  can  be  modified  by  adminis- 
tering food  supply  through  the  media  of  environment.  Good  tendencies 
can  be  nourished  and  developed  and  bad  tendencies  atrophied.  What 
Burbank,  working  under  the  laws  of  growth,  has  accomplished  for  flow- 
ers and  fruit,  Tompkins  believed  was  possible  of  achievement  for  the 
child  by  the  teacher  intelligently  working  under  the  same  law.  There 
is  nothing  new  in  this  creed.  It  is  as  old  as  “the  sermon  on  the  Mount.” 
Like  the  Great  Master,  Tompkins  believed  in  the  possibilities  of  infinite 
development  of  the  soul  of  the  child. 

His  life  and  his  teachings  were  protests  against  the  tendency  to 
commercialize  education.  Like  Sidney  Lanier  he  plead  for  more  stress 
to  be  laid  on  the  development  of  the  heart. 

“O  trade,  O trade,  would  thou  wert  dead, 

The  times  need  heart,  we’re  tired  of  head.” 

Surely  he  was  right.  The  training  of  the  intellect  alone  always 
leads  to  self-seeking  and  selfishness.  The  training  of  the  heart  leads 
just  as  surely  to  a broad  catholicity  of  spirit  and  to  fraternity  of  human 
interests.  We  cannot  learn  too  often  and  too  well  that  the  things  of  the 
spirit  cannot  be  bartered  for  gold.  This  is  the  philosophy  of  education 
that  Arnold  Tompkins  tried  to  put  into  the  American  schools.  He  lived 
what  he  taught  and  American  professional  thought  is  infinitely  richer 
for  his  life. 


■ 


From  a Letter  to  Mrs.  Tompkins. 

The  loss  of  our  beloved  Principal  comes  to  each  one  of  us 
with  all  the  bitterness  of  a personal  bereavement.  During  the  few 
years  of  our  labors  together  we  learned  to  look  upon  him  as  a 
friend,  upon  the  sincerity  of  whose  judgment  we  could  always 
depend.  Time  can  only  endear,  it  can  never  obliterate,  the  in- 
fluence of  his  sweet  spirit  and  the  inspiration  of  his  enthusiastic 
and  well-balanced  character. 

He  was  always  cheerful,  vigilant  and  helpful,  yet  we  knew 
that  he  “suffered  much  and  was  kind”. 

We  saw  in  him  a charming  personality,  quiet  humor,  generous 
self-forgetfulness  and  enthusiastic  devotion  to  the  cause  of  educa- 
tion. We  can  hardly  now  persuade  ourselves  that  he  is  not  to  be 
among  us  any  more,  but  we  find  comfort  in  the  thought  that  his 
spirit  will  rejoice  to  know  that  his  followers,  under  the  inspiration 
of  his  teaching,  shall  continue  to  aid  mankind  “to  find  within  itself 
the  power  to  rise  above  itself”.  The  Faculty. 

Resolutions  of  the  Chicago  Principals'  Association. 

In  the  death  of  Arnold  Tompkins,  those  who  knew  him  in 
personal  relation  have  lost  a rare  friend,  those  who  knew  him  pro- 
fessionally, a shower  of  the  way  to  the  deepest  springs  of  life  and 
to  the  highest  goal  in  a work  which  to  him  was  holy  in  its  smallest 
details. 

Even  those  who  saw  and  heard  him  but  incidentally  in  his  elo- 
quent appeals  — eloquent  in  their  lucid  sincerity  — obtained  from 
him  inspiration  that  lifted  their  life  and  work  to  broader  plains 
and  clearer  skies. 

His  immediate  colleagues  had  in  him  a leader  who  enlisted 
fullest  self-active  cooperation  in  the  service  of  ideals  which  he 
had  the  art  to  connect  with  the  nearest  work  and  to  place  within 
the  reach  of  the  free  aspiration  of  all.  His  pupils  were  stirred  by 
him  in  the  very  heart  of  hearts,  and,  under  the  spell  of  his  sympa- 
thetic presence,  they  discovered  within  themselves  truths  and 
possibilities  which  rendered  them  worthy  of  the  highest  aims  and 
of  the  deepest  and  sweetest  responsibilities  of  life. 

To  all  of  us  he  has  left  a rich  legacy  of  light  to  guide  us,  and 
of  strength  to  sustain  us  in  a life  of  worthy  service  in  our  steward- 
ship. He  saw  the  inmost  soul  of  the  living  universe  and  of  all  that 
therein  lives  in  self-activity,  in  its  highest  manifestations  a free, 
[21] 


seeing,  purposeful,  unifying  force.  By  this  each  throbbing  life- 
pulse,  howsoever  minute,  was  to  him  akin  to  universal  life;  by  this 
every  true  responsibility  was  intrinsically  related  to  the  whole  and 
held  religious  fervor,  ceased  to  be  trivial  and  became  universal; 
by  this  every  joy  of  achievement  even  in  the  seemingly  narrowest 
service,  became  to  him  a universal  joy,  every  “well  done”  that 
came  to  him  meant  the  approval  of  the  universe,  duties  lost  their 
quantitative  aspect  and  all  became  equally  great. 

Thus  he  left  to  us  a great  responsiblity,  great  in  the  meaning 
and  sweet  in  the  joy  it  holds.  In  the  measure  in  which  we  shall 
live  up  to  the  requirements  of  this  responsibility  in  professional 
and  personal  relations  will  he  continue  to  live  and  work  among  us 
and  in  us  and  continue  to  bless  the  work  of  education  which  was 
so  dear  to  his  undying  soul. 

Resolved , that  these  resolutions  be  spread  upon  the  records  of 
the  Chicago  Principals’  Association,  and  that  an  engrossed  copy  of 
the  same  be  sent  to  his  family. 


W.  N.  Hailmann 
Gertrude  E.  English 
Luella  V.  Little 
Wm.  M.  Lawrence 


1 

> Committee. 


Arnold  Tompkins  became  president  of  the  Illinois  State 
Normal  University  in  September  1899  and  served  for  one  year.  He 
brought  into  the  school  an  element  of  consecration  to  duty,  a single- 
ness of  purpose,  a faith  in  human  nature,  a breadth  of  philosophy, 
and  withal  a fund  of  humor,  breezy,  fresh,  invigorating,  whose 
tonic  effects  could  be  felt  in  every  class  room,  in  every  region  of 
student  activity.  True  these  elements  were  already  in  the  life  of 
the  institution,  but  they  received  a fresh  emphasis,  the  stimulation 
of  a mighty  impulse  from  a fresh  and  original  source. 

With  the  new  regime  came  growth.  Growth  is  not  mere  in- 
crease in  bulk;  it  involves  internal  change  to  meet  new  conditions. 
In  this  sense  the  growth  of  an  institution  is  not  uniform  and  con- 
tinuous. It  grows  rather  like  a crustacean  that  periodically  sheds 
its  skin  that  it  may  expand  in  the  freedom  of  a larger  life.  When- 
ever an  institution  comes  to  regard  itself  as  the  best  of  its  kind, 
and  puts  in  its  time  complacently  viewing  its  own  perfection 
growth  stops.  It  becomes  encrusted  in  its  habits  of  thought  and 
activity  and  fails  to  respond  to  new  demands.  No  year  in  the  last 
thirty  witnessed  more  radical  changes  in  the  organization,  the  ad- 
ministration, and  the  spirit  of  the  State  Normal  School.  A new 
flexible  course  of  study  was  adopted,  planned  for  the  varying  needs 
of  different  grades  of  students.  There  came  more  freedom  in  the 


[22] 


school  life — less  pressure,  more  spontaneity.  Attendance  was  de- 
manded only  in  the  class  room  and  at  general  exercises.  Spelling 
ceased  to  vex  the  soul  of  the  student  whose  sense  of  uniformity 
and  whose  abiding  faith  in  the  reign  of  law  were  constantly  viola- 
ted by  the  absurdities  of  the  English  tongue. 

Dr.  Tompkins  won  and  held  the  esteem  of  the  entire  commu- 
nity. From  his  associates  in  the  faculty,  from  the  student  body, 
from  the  citizens  of  the  town  was  never  heard  a discordant  note. 
There  was  a universal  sense  of  personal  loss  when  it  became 
known  that  President  Tompkins  had  left  us  for  the  more  attractive 
field  of  Chicago.  But  the  work  he  did  in  that  year  has  endured. 
The  subsequent  life  of  the  school  has  flowed  along  the  channels 
into  which  he  turned  it.  The  influence  of  his  rare  spirit  lingers 
with  it  as  a benediction.  David  Felmley, 

President  Illinois  State  Normal  University . 

In  the  power  of  vivid  presentation  of  educational  doctrine  and 
ideas,  Arnold  Tompkins  had  few  equals  in  the  United  States.  He 
could  make  the  commonest  of  us  feel  the  truth  of  his  frequent 
declaration  that  “The  whole  sky  of  truth  bends  over  each  recita- 
tion; and  the  teacher  needs  but  climb  Sinai  to  receive  the  divine 
law.”  It  can  never  be  known  how  many  have  climbed  a little 
higher  because  of  his  inspiration,  and  are  thereby  indebted  to  him 
for  a broader  conception  of  the  nature  and  dignity  of  the  teaching 
process.  Strong  men  who  did  not  see  the  truth  as  he  saw  it  will 
concede  the  intellectual  integrity  and  greatness  of  the  man.  His 
personal  friends  will  mourn  the  departure  of  a man  in  whom  they 
believed  because  of  his  rugged  honesty,  his  candor,  generosity, 
kindness,  and  charity.  To  all  these  the  enforced  farewell  will  be 
one  of  sadness  mingled  with  pride  in  the  possessions  he  has  left  us. 

Alfred  Bayliss, 

State  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction , Illinois. 

Arnold  Tompkins  was  a great  Soul— the  greatest  I have 
ever  known.  He  was  great  in  his  power  to  see  the  soul  in  things 
— the  principle  or  law  which  creates  and  guides.  Other  minds  be- 
come entangled  with  details  or  toy  with  some  superficial  aspect, 
but  Arnold  Tompkins  cut  straight  to  the  center.  He  saw  details 
and  the  subordinate  phases  of  a subject,  but  under  the  operation 
of  his  mind  they  fell  into  the  places  in  his  thought  to  which  their 
value  and  significance  entitled  them.  Scientists  sometimes  lose 
themselves  in  the  accumulation  of  multiplied  facts  and  philoso- 
phers often  dream  and  soar  among  wholes.  Arnold  Tompkins, 
with  the  skill  of  both,  put  his  finger  on  the  relation  between  the 
two.  Both  the  particular  and  the  general,  the  part  and  the  whole, 
[23J 


were  always  within  the  range  of  his  vision.  His  mind  unerringly 
traced  facts  back  to  law  and  law  out  into  facts.  Therefore,  the 
finished  product  was  a body  of  perfectly  organized  knowledge. 
His  School  Management  is  probably  the  best  example  of  this 
power  among  his  writings,  and  has  few  equals  in  educational 
literature. 

The  tragedy  of  Arnold  Tompkins’s  death  lay  in  the  fact  that 
no  opportunity  ever  came  which  permitted  him  to  formulate  a 
Philosophy  of  Education.  That  he  could  have  produced  a master- 
piece is  the  belief  of  everyone  who  knew  his  power  of  organization. 

The  clearness  and  intensity  of  Dr.  Tompkins’s  vision  gave  him 
an  enthusiasm  for  his  educational  ideals  such  as  few  men  have 
ever  possessed.  He  was  a genuine  educational  missionary.  He 
inspired  students  in  his  own  classes  and  stirred  educational  speak- 
ers. Dr.  Tompkins  was  the  prince  of  educational  speakers. 
Other  men  might  please  and  stir  an  audience  of  teachers  to  a 
greater  degree,  but  none  could  stand  before  an  audience — whether 
a Teachers’  Institute  or  a State  or  a National  Assembly  — and  so 
enchain  attention  by  the  discussion  of  a great  educational  doc- 
trine. Wm.  h.  Mace, 

Syracuse  University. 


The  news  of  the  death  of  Dr.  Arnold  Tompkins  came  upon 
me  as  an  overwhelming  sorrow;  so  sudden,  so  unexpected!  Only 
a few  days  before  I had  received  from  him  one  of  those  cheery, 
hopeful  letters  that  I prized  so  much  through  twenty  years  of  in- 
timate, friendly  correspondence.  It  still  lay  on  my  desk  unan- 
swered when  I read  the  dispatch  announcing  his  death. 

He  was  in  many  ways  the  greatest  soul  I have  ever  known. 
He  had  that  simplicity  of  character  which  is  found  only  in  the 
greatest  souls.  It  was  not  the  simplicity  of  ignorance,  nor  yet 
that  studied  simplicity  which  many  scholars  assume,  but  the  sim- 
plicity of  transparent  honesty  and  perfect  insight.  He  saw  good- 
ness and  truth  in  forms  of  beauty  and  gave  himself  wholly  up  to 
the  influence  of  the  beatific  vision.  He  so  completely  identified 
himself  with  his  beliefs  that  he  was  himself  the  living  embodiment 
of  his  philosophy  of  life.  What  a wholesome  companion  he  was! 
The  petty  jealousies  and  narrow  prejudices  of  life  found  no  en- 
couragement from  him.  He  saw  things  in  perspective  and  knew 
the  significant  and  worthy  thing  at  first  sight.  It  was  a great  in- 
spiration merely  to  be  with  him,  independently  of  what  he  might 
say  at  any  one  time.  You  seemed  to  feel  in  his  presence  that  he 
could  say  anything  great  and  noble  on  occasion;  and  even  when 
he  spoke  of  the  trivial  it  seemed  to  take  on  its  largest  significance. 

[24] 


I count  myself  to  have  been  fortunate  that  I came  to  know 
him  when  he  and  I were  both  new  to  the  work  of  teaching.  We 
studied  many  of  its  problems  together  and  compared  our  views 
with  the  absolute  freedom  of  perfect  friendship.  I owe  many  of 
my  best  thoughts  and  purposes  to  the  hours  I was  privileged  to 
spend  with  him. 

He  will  be  best  remembered,  probably,  as  one  who  could 
state  the  ends,  purposes  and  means  of  education  in  alluring  forms 
and  with  appealing  power.  He  was  inspirational  rather  than  log- 
ical. In  the  class  room  he  impressed  what  he  taught  by  the  sin- 
cerity and  directness  of  his  appeal.  He  touched  emotions  and 
the  will  and  never  rested  satisfied  with  merely  making  the  matter 
clear  as  to  its  facts;  the  significance  of  the  facts  and  their  bearing 
upon  education  and  life  must  be  seen  and  felt  by  all  before  he 
considered  his  teaching  successful. 

As  an  author,  though  he  wrote  many  successful  books,  he  will 
be  longest  remembered  through  the  Philosophy  of  Teaching. 
This  book  expressed  the  essence  of  his  educational  doctrine  in 
compact  and  pleasing  form.  Whatever  else  he  wrote  or  whatever 
else  he  might  ever  have  written,  could  be  but  the  amplification  or 
explanation  of  that  doctrine.  It  was  so  comprehensive  in  its  im- 
plications that  all  else  must  be  mere  explication. 

But  after  all  I enjoyed  him  most  upon  the  public  platform 
He  was  indeed  an  orator.  He  touched  and  swayed  an  audience 
with  an  ease  and  certainty  that  I have  seen  equaled  but  few  times 
in  my  life.  Webster  has  said  that  eloquence  exists  in  the  happy 
combination  of  three  things— the  man,  the  subject  and  the  occa- 
sion. Dr.  Tompkins  was  always  the  man,  any  audience  became 
his  occasion,  and  any  theme  became  luminous  and  inspiring  under 
his  treatment.  So  great  was  his  gift  of  conception  and  expression 
in  public  speech  that  I often  urged  him  to  give  up  his  connection 
with  specific  institutions  and  devote  himself  to  the  instruction  of 
the  people  from  the  public  platform.  His  last  written  line  to  me 
was  a partial  promise  that  he  would  soon  do  this.  But  for  his  un- 
timely'death  he  would  have  become  a great  public  teacher  in  a 
larger  sense  even  than  that  in  which  he  has  reached  such 
eminence. 

But  it  was  his  loving  and  lovable  personality  after  all  that 
most  distinguished  him  from  his  fellows.  His  noble  altruism,  his 
sincere  friendship,  his  high  enthusiasms  and  his  absolute  devo- 
tion to  principle  and  duty,  were  all  of  them  continual  inspirations 
to  those  who  were  enriched  by  his  friendship. 

L.  H.  Jones, 

President  Michigan  Normal  College. 


[25] 


It  was  my  good  fortune  to  meet  Dr.  Tompkins  years  ago  in 
the  institute  work  in  this  State.  I was  impressed  from  the  begin- 
ning with  the  earnestness  and  candor  of  the  man.  He  was  devoted 
absolutely  to  his  work  as  a teacher.  He  loved  to  speak  to  teachers 
and  teachers  loved  to  listen  to  him.  His  sympathies  were  broad 
and  his  spirit  generous.  I have  seldom  met  anyone  with  a sweeter 
charity  or  with  loftier  ideals  than  those  he  entertained  and  con- 
stantly exemplified. 

My  most  precious  memory  of  him  goes  back  to  an  evening 
when  after  a day  of  arduous  labor  in  an  Institute,  we  walked  to- 
gether on  the  summit  of  the  Allegheny  mountains  and  witnessed 
a most  glorious  sunset.  The  magnificent  vista  spread  out  before 
us  opened  his  spirit  and  he  spoke  with  perfect  freedom  of  his  great 
and  abiding  conviction  that  God  is  back  of  all  natural  phenomena, 
and  that  faith  in  Him  is  vital  to  man’s  highest  development.  It 
seemed  to  me  as  he  spoke  as  if  somehow  he  had  interpreted  the 
magnificent  glory  of  the  scene  around  us,  and  in  the  twilight  with 
our  hearts  in  closer  sympathy  than  ever  before,  we  walked  back 
to  the  city. 

His  influence  among  teachers  of  the  State  has  seldom  been 
equaled  by  any  teacher  that  has  come  to  us,  and  e memory  of 
his  work  and  the  inspiration  of  his  personality  will  long  be  cher- 
ished in  the  Keystone  State.  I loved  the  man  because  he  was 
earnest  and  broadminded  and  full  of  “charity  that  thinketh  no 
evil.”  His  untimely  death  is  a great  loss  to  the  profession,  but 
his  example  will  be  a cherished  memory  for  generations  to  come. 

M.  J.  Brumbaugh. 

University  of  Pennsylvania. 

My  acquaintance  with  Arnold  Tompkins  began  when  he  en- 
tered the  Indiana  State  Normal  School  as  a student  in  1875.  At 
the  time  of  his  entrance  he  was  a person  of  more  mature  years 
than  was  the  average  student  in  the  institution  at  that  time. 

As  I remember  him  then,  he  was,  physically,  of  somewhat 
stalwart  mold.  He  had  that  balance  of  temperament  which  en- 
abled him  to  perform  either  mental  or  physical  work  with  patience 
and  persistence.  * * * * 

In  the  intellectual  atmosphere  created  by  the  fundamental 
conception  on  which  this  school  was  organized,  Arnold  Tompkins 
began  his  achievements.  The  results  of  his  labors  have  been 
made  permanent,  in  part,  by  his  books — “The  Science  of  Dis- 
course,” “The  Philosophy  of  Teaching,”  and  “The  Philosophy  of 
School  Management.” 

It  seems  to  me  these  works  are  distinguished  contributions  to 

[26] 


the  philosophy  of  the  subjects  treated  and  to  the  science  of  ped- 
agogy  as  well. 

I remember  Mr.  Tompkins’s  deep  interest  in  our  investigation 
of  the  origin  and  idea  of  the  school.  In  these  inquiries  it  was  not 
so  much  the  historical  origin  of  the  school  that  we  sought  as  it  was 
the  origin  of  the  school  in  the  necessities  of  the  individual  in  his 
physical  and  social  environment. 

I should  not  fail  to  mention  a marked  characteristic  of  Mr. 
Tompkins  as  a student.  When  asked  to  stand  up  and  tell  what 
he  knew,  or  did  not  know,  about  any  particular  point  under  dis- 
cussion, he  never  got  restive  or  impatient  or  confused,  as  though 
he  were  being  persecuted  by  questions  and  cross-questions.  The 
more  incisive  the  questioner,  the  better  he  liked  it. 

It  is  now  more  than  twenty-five  years  since  I saw  Mr.  Tomp- 
kins. We  have  occasionally  exchanged  letters.  He  has  sent  me 
his  books  as  he  published  them.  I have  read  them  with  admira- 
tion for  the  work  and  the  workman.  The  quondam  teacher  has 
become  the  disciple, 

I have  a sense  of  personal  loss.  A sincere,  generous,  warm- 
hearted friend  has  vanished.  His  work  remains — more  enduring 
than  monument  of  marble  or  bronze. 

The  greater  public  has  lost  the  efficient  services  of  a truly 
philosophical  educator.  Such  men  are  few  in  number. 

Wm.  A.  Jones,  Hastings,  Neb. 

Of  all  the  educators  I have  ever  seen  before  a class  in  high 
schools,  normal  schools,  colleges,  or  universities,  Arnold  Tompkins 
is  the  best,  according  to  my  ideas  of  what  a model  teacher  should 
be,  do,  and  say,  and  in  getting  pupils  to  tell  what  they  think  they 
know,  and  how  to  arrange,  classify  and  apply  their  knowledge. 
Doubt,  in  going  from  the  individual  to  the  general  or  universal 
idea,  or  the  converse,  had  no  place  in  that  recitation.  The  pupils 
knew  what  they  knew,  and  they  knew  how  and  why  they  knew — 
which  was  better  still.  Words  fail  me  to  paint  his  manner.  There 
was  no  dignitarial  barrier  between  him  and  those  young  people. 
They  knew  and  felt  and  understood. 

Supt.  J.  M.  Greenwood, 

[From  The  Journal  of  Education.]  Kansas  City. 


During  the  years  that  Dr.  Tompkins  visited  Pennsylvania  in- 
stitutes he  made  many  friends  and  won  unbounded  admiration 
from  those  who  heard  his  lectures.  His  delivery  was  pleasant  to 
the  listener;  his  philosophy  was  mingled  with  humor;  and  his  en- 
[27] 


thusiasm  kindled  a fire  that  did  not  burn  out  with  his  departure. 
His  friends  in  Pennsylvania  learned  with  deep  regret  of  his  un- 
timely death.  Nathan  C.  Schaeffer, 

State  Superintendent  of  Pennsylvania. 


The  character  and  work  of  Arnold  Tompkins  have  been  such 
as  to  be  an  illuminating  force  for  all  who  have  come  and  who  may 
come  under  the  influence  of  his  life  work.  He  had  that  broad, 
catholic  view  of  education  which  marks  the  distinction  between 
the  mere  pedagogue  and  the  genuine  school-master.  To  have 
known  him  is  to  have  come  into  communion  with  one  whose  whole 
nature  was  ever  leading  all  who  came  under  the  spell  of  his  mes- 
sage to  a higher,  holier  view  of  life  in  all  of  its  aspects. 

Perhaps  the  most  noticeable  characteristic  of  this  man  was 
such  unworldliness  as  made  it  well  nigh  impossible  for  him  to  con- 
ceive of  dishonesty  until  it  had  preyed  upon  the  things  he  loved 
to  their  threatened  destruction.  He  obeyed  certain  guiding  prin- 
ciples by  means  of  which  he  measured  the  value  of  what  men  did 
and  of  what  they  were.  Idealist  though  he  was,  he  was  at  the 
same  time  the  sanest  sort  of  realist.  His  interpretation  of  art  has 
been  most  suggestive  to  many  who  have  gained  their  first  notions 
of  the  aesthetic,  the  ethical,  the  spiritual  from  his  sound  views 
upon  the  significance  of  beauty. 

However  much  one  may  differ  from  him  in  his  philosophy,  no 
one  who  knew  him  can  fail  to  pay  him  the  tribute  of  honesty  of 
purpose,  and  of  a beautiful,  inspiring  life  and  character.  Many 
have  sat  at  the  feet  of  Arnold  Tompkins  to  learn  the  lessons  that 
come  alone  from  a great,  unselfish  soul. 

Emma  Mont  McRae, 

Purdue  University . 


The  winning  power  of  his  great  personality  moved  men 
deeply.  Life  quickened  in  his  presence.  His  spirit,  ever  seeking 
better  things,  touched  with  fire  the  mind  self-satisfied,  and  warmed 
into  new  life  the  seeker’s  noble  aspiration.  He  was  a teacher 
whose  living  words  still  search  the  minds  of  men,  the  beauty  of 
whose  noble  life,  a heritage  divine,  is  with  us  still. 

J.  E.  McGilvrey. 

Principal  City  Normal  School , Cleveland , Ohio. 

I met  Dr.  Arnold  Tompkins  for  the  first  time  a number  of 
years  ago  in  an  Institute  in  Pennsylvania.  From  the  first  I was 
strongly  impressed  with  the  sweetness  and  simplicity  of  his  char- 
acter and  with  the  loftiness  of  his  personal  and  professional  ideals. 

[28] 


The  longer  I knew  him,  the  deeper  this  impression  became,  until 
I came  to  think  of  him  as  one  of  the  rarest,  most  beautiful  spirits 
I have  ever  had  the  pleasure  of  knowing. 

J.  P.  Gordy, 

DepH.  of  Philosophy  of  Education,  New  York  University . 


I had  abundant  opportunity  at  DePauw  Normal  School, 
Greencastle,  Indiana,  to  see  the  remarkable  influence  he  had 
over  his  students  and  how  it  was  all  exerted  to  lead  them  to  attain 
to  the  best  that  was  in  them.  They  believed  in  him  as  the  embodi- 
ment of  all  that  they  ought  to  strive  after. 

To  know  Dr.  Tompkins  truly  was  to  be  drawn  to  him  strongly. 
And  it  was  worth  while  to  get  away  from  the  beaten  path  to  know 
him.  I am  sure  my  life  is  enriched  by  the  privilege  I had  of  com- 
ing into  fellowship  with  him.  Robert  A.  Ogg. 

Superintendent  Kokomo,  Ind.  Schools. 

My  acquaintance  with  Dr.  Arnold  Tompkins  was  not  exten- 
sive or  intimate,  and  it  was  mainly  professional  rather  than  per- 
sonal. My  knowledge  of  him  sufficed,  however,  to  impress  me 
with  the  richness  of  the  man’s  personality  and  with  the  depth  and 
reach  of  his  mental  life  and  stores.  His  education  was  ample, 
his  heart  warm,  his  ideals  high,  his  life  pure,  his  industry  exem- 
plary. So  extraordinary  did  I feel  his  promise  as  a teacher  of 
teachers  to  be  that,  on  Principal  Francis  W.  Parker’s  resignation, 
my  resolution  was  at  once  taken  to  nominate  Tompkins  as  the 
successor  of  that  distinguished  master.  I hailed  him  as  fit  prophet 
to  receive  the  Parker  mantle,  the  man  best  adapted,  among  all  of 
whom  I knew,  to  carry  forward  the  important  educational  reform 
so  well  begun  at  the  Chicago  Normal.  In  his  all  too  brief  work 
there  he  did  not  disappoint  me.  His  death  is  a distinct  loss  to  the 
cause  of  rational  pedagogy  in  America.  Those  who  knew  and 
loved  the  man  do  well  to  try  and  preserve  his  memory. 

E.  Benjamin  Andrews, 

Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Nebraska. 

Dr.  Arnold  Tompkins  had  a clear  eye  for  two  things  that  are 
exceedingly  essential  in  all  educational  progress.  First,  he  saw 
things  as  they  really  are;  and,  second,  he  saw  them  as  they  truly 
ought  to  be.  This  is  a great  combination  of  abilities,  and  is  as 
rare  as  it  is  valuable.  The  educational  world  has  seen  many 
leaders  who  have  beheld  one  of  these  items  well  enough,  but  who 
have  failed,  to  a greater  or  less  extent,  to  comprehend  the  other. 
Dr.  Tompkins  was  exceedingly  fortunate  in  that  he  saw  both 
with  even  eyes. 


(29) 


Besides  this,  he  was  strong  in  his  ways  of  trying  to  make 
what  ought  to  be  out  of  what  is.  In  this  he  exhibited  good  com- 
mon sense  and  rare  skill.  He  was  satisfied  to  attempt  the  possi- 
ble, and  wasted  neither  time  nor  strength  in  straining  after  what 
could  never  be.  He  measured  capacities  before  planning  results, 
and  so  his  work  was  wont  to  arrive. 

But,  after  all,  his  greatest  source  of  strength  lay  in  his  ability 
to  love.  He  loved  his  work,  but  far  and  away  beyond  that,  he 
loved  those  he  worked  for.  These  he  loved,  “not  with  allowance, 
but  with  personal  love,”  and  this  is  the  greatest  thing  in  the  world. 
His  heart  went  out  to  humanity,  and  the  thought  behind  his  every 
word  and  deed  was,  how  to  make  these  tally  for  the  good  of  his 
fellow  men. 

And  as  he  loved,  so  he  was  loved  in  turn.  He  was  “one  of 
those  whom  it  was  good  to  be  near  and  to  touch.”  His  personality 
was  great,  and  it  is  this  which  will  live  after  him  in  the  lives  of 
those  who  touched  him  as  a teacher,  or  through  his  books.  Surely, 
with  such  things  as  these  accomplished,  his  immortality  is  assured. 

Wm.  Hawley  Smith,  Peoria  111. 

The  news  of  Dr.  Arnold  Tompkins’s  death  came  to  me  as  a 
great  shock.  I had  come  to  love  him  for  his  rich  manhood,  ad- 
mire him  for  his  sane  philosophical  teachings,  respect  him  for  his 
earnest  devotion  to  the  profession  he  honored  and  rank  him  as 
one  of  the  masters  in  the  work  to  which  he  devoted  his  great  tal- 
ents and  gave  his  life.  His  death  is  a personal  bereavement  to 
thousands  and  a loss  to  the  Cause.  w.  Stetson, 

State  Superintendent  of  Maine. 


The  death  of  Arnold  Tompkins  is  a great  loss  to  our  educa- 
tional forces.  It  was  so  sudden,  so  unexpected,  to  human  eyes  so 
needless,  that  it  came  to  me  almost  with  the  power  of  a tragedy. 
His  charming  personality  endeared  him  to  us  as  a friend  and  com- 
panion; his  earnestness  and  sincerity  made  him  a power  before 
his  classes,  and  the  inspiration  of  his  words  and  his  manner  of 
address  made  him  an  acceptable  speaker  whenever  he  had  occa- 
sion to  meet  a company  of  teachers.  An  entirely  different  man 
from  his  predecessor,  yet  he  took  up  the  work  in  much  the  same 
spirit.  Like  him  he  earnestly  and  solely  desired  the  best  things 
for  the  cause  which  each  counted  so  near  his  heart.  A man  of 
high  ideals  and  of  great  tenacity  of  purpose,  he  knew  the  devious 
ways  of  the  school  politician  only  to  discard  them  as  beneath  his 
manhood.  The  world  was  just  beginning  to  know  the  real  worth 
of  Arnold  Tompkins  when  he  died.  Had  he  lived  he  would  have 


[30J 


accomplished  yet  greater  things.  As  it  is  there  are  hundreds  who 
deem  themselves  fortunate  that  they  came  within  the  sphere  of 
his  influence,  and  who,  in  loving  hearts,  cherish  his  memory  as  a 
priceless  legacy.  Henry  Sabin, 

Ex-State  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction 
of  Iowa,  Des  Moines,  la. 


A man  who  speaks  in  public  usually  adapts  himself  to  a cer- 
tain audience;  one  to  a congregation,  another  to  a jury  and  another 
to  a class.  Arnold  Tompkins’s  audience  was  the  institute.  He 
was  a versatile  man.  He  could  speak  well  under  almost  any 
circumstances  and  in  almast  any  company.  He  was  a very  fine 
teacher,  exerting  an  extraordinary  influence  over  those  in  his 
classes.  But  his  own  audience,  as  I think,  was  the  institute,  a 
company  of  teachers,  whether  fifty  or  a thousand,  assembled  for 
instruction  and  inspiration  in  matters  pedagogical.  In  that  pres- 
ence Arnold  Tompkins  was  supreme.  Before  that  audience  he 
was,  in  fact,  a great  preacher.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  few  preachers 
of  the  past  generation  have  exerted  a wider,  deeper,  or  more  benef- 
icent influence.  Wm.  L.  Bryan, 

President  of  Indiana  University . 

I shall  never  forget' the  first  time  I met  and  heard  Arnold 
Tompkins,  at  a cpunty  institute  in  northern  Illinois.  His  inde- 
pendent and  original  ought,  in  its  striking  statement,  challenged 
attention  and  called  forth  vigorous  thought  in  reply.  He  was  in 
earnest  sympathy  with  the  needs  of  the  teachers,  understood  their 
problems,  and  met  them  in  their  own  field.  His  words  were  cour- 
ageous, cheery,  and  wise,  often  quaintly  phrased,  sticking  fast  in 
the  memory.  His  enthusiasm  was  contagious,  his  spirit  uplifting. 

A later  acquaintance  strengthened  my  respect  and  admiration 
for  his  genuine  nature  and  his  helpful  work.  He  has  been  a great 
help  to  numberless  young  men  and  women,  and  the  force  of  his 
personality  will  abide.  Sarah  Louise  Arnold, 

Dean  of  Simmons  College. 


[31] 


